3 ms·

> Discord dropped the hammer: mandatory age verification for all users is rolling out next month. The era of anonymous gaming chats is officially over. This is

> Discord dropped the hammer: mandatory age verification for all users is rolling out next month. The era of anonymous gaming chats is officially over. This isn't really accurate. Age verification is not mandatory for all accounts. You will be able to join a Discord with your friends, chat, and do voice without age verification. Here's the exact list of what's restricted if you don't verify: > Content Filters: Discord users will need to be age-assured as adults in order to unblur sensitive content or turn off the setting. > Age-gated Spaces – Only users who are age-assured as adults will be able to access age-restricted channels, servers, and app commands. > Message Request Inbox: Direct messages from people a user may not know are routed to a separate inbox by default, and access to modify this setting is limited to age-assured adult users. > Friend Request Alerts: People will receive warning prompts for friend requests from users they may not know. > Stage Restrictions: Only age-assured adults may speak on stage in servers. Taken from the announcement https://discord.com/press-releases/discord-launches-teen-by-default-settings-globally https://discord.com/press-releases/discord-launches-teen-by-... So the claim that Discord is making ID verification "mandatory" or that you need it for gaming chats is untrue.

orbital-decay 9mo ago
A ton of very niche communities are age-restricted and there's no way users in them would doxx themselves, so this is the end of those communities.
hidden80 9mo ago
This. We've gotten really bad at headline bangin.
rockskon 9mo ago
Discord says they'll use some AI garbage tool. Those are prone to mistakes over a large enough userbase. It will not be a rare occurrence for an adult to be labelled a child until they debase themselves with a scan of their face or a copy of their government ID. For children - this mandate also still makes the decision on behalf of the parents that a child must submit a scan of their face to a third party. Moving to Persona for age verification involves verification data being sent outside of the user's phone - in direct contradiction to Discord's initial promise of keeping facial scan data solely on the phone. Third parties that we've been given no reason to trust will delete the data without using it for an improper purpose such as creating derivative info from the ID or facial scan itself unrelated to the sole purpose of verifying that an individual is an adult. While we're at it - is there any legitimate reason why Discord is associating a person's actual or estimated age with their account as opposed to storing a value that states if they are or are not an adult? That sort of granularity seems unrelated to the stated purpose.
- mpeg 9mo ago
  I don't love what discord is doing, but where are you getting the idea that discord is going to estimate the user's age using "some AI garbage tool"? The article says everyone is on "child" mode by default, and verification is only required if you need to use the features / access content marked as adult only.
  - JohnMakin 9mo ago
    I know of at least one person who's child was flagged as 17 when they were 14. That seems like a mistake that should never, ever, ever happen if your goal is safety. The software sucks. The methodology sucks. The reason is flimsy at best.
    - eucyclos 9mo ago
      never, ever is quite strong wording when you're in an arms race with 14 year olds who want to gain illicit access to something digital. I know everyone's a digital native these days and real life isn't a 90s hacker movie, but 'rarely' already seems like a pretty high bar given how ingenious a 14 year old deprived of their preferred entertainment can get.
      - JohnMakin 9mo ago
        if your goal and reasoning is child safety this is a big issue that it can even happen. my point is these tools are unreliable. It is using a problem that cannot be fixed as justification for a big privacy invasion. I was 14 once too, that’s how I got into what I do now.
        fushihara 9mo ago
        Then, out of respect for your view that children’s safety must be the absolute top priority and that false positives must never, ever be tolerated, let’s require people to personally visit Discord’s office in the United States with a government-issued ID, have it inspected, and formally swear an oath. Of course, Discord will retain the ID and the person’s facial photograph for a semi-permanent period. Naturally, that’s perfectly acceptable—after all, it’s for the safety of the children, right?
CivBase 9mo ago
> This is false. Age verification is not mandatory for all accounts. You will be able to join a Discord with your friends, chat, and do voice without age verification. You are correct. For now. But why would they stop there? Supposedly this is to protect teens. If that's true, why would they continue letting teens chat with anonymous users? What if they get tricked into sharing sensitive images or video of themselves? Surely we need to know everyone's ID to ensure teens aren't unwittingly chatting with a known predator. It's for their safety. But for now that's a bridge too far. For now. And why should we believe this even has anything to do with protecting teens? That's valuable data. Discord says they're not holding onto it... for now. But Discord is offering quite a lot to users for free. Why let such an obvious revenue source go unmonetized? They're doing this now because they're going public soon. Investors want an ROI and this action is sure to invite some competition. The people leaving want an alternative, so a competitor could get a foothold. Discord needs to stay ahead. And the users Discord keeps after this stunt are going to be the most resilient to leaving - the most exploitable. Surely they wouldn't care if the policy changes in the future. The sky isn't falling. But the frog is boiling.
- renewiltord 9mo ago
  Indeed, I've been saying this for decades now. Hacker News needs usernames to post. How long before they require real names? And then how long before they require IDs for those real names? And then how long before they need you to show up in person with your IDs for those real names? And then how long before they need you to bring notarized documents in person with your IDs for those real names? All so that we can post online about how Google is invading our privacy?
  - CivBase 9mo ago
    I gave reasons for why Discord would escalate things. Your mocking example did not. That's the difference between a slippery slope fallacy and a legitimate argument.
    - renewiltord 9mo ago
      [flagged]
echelon 9mo ago
Let's call this what it is: 1. A way for politicians and the state to track porn habits to US citizens and use that information against them in the future. Blackmail for the future politicians, business leaders, and wealthy to coerce them into doing what those in power want. 2. A way for conservatives to tighten the noose around non-chaste materials and begin to purge them from the internet. And if that works, that's hardly the last thing that will go. Next will be LGBT content, women's rights content, atheist content, pro-labor content, and more. (Or if you're on the other side of the political spectrum, consider that the powers could be used to remove Christian content, 2nd Amendment content, etc. It doesn't really matter what is being removed, just that the mechanisms are in place and that powers can put a lid on the populace.) We aren't screaming loudly enough. Do not try to sugar coat this with a pedantic mistake. This is far worse. It's a first step down a path the Big Brother state wants. Yell. Scream. Protest.
- Aurornis 9mo ago
  > 1. A way for politicians and the state to track porn habits to US citizens and use that information against them in the future. This topic really brings out the crazy conspiracy theories. No, politicians are not using Discord age verification to track constituents' porn habits and blackmail them with it later.
  - echelon 9mo ago
    You poor summer child. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEXINT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEXINT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexpionage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexpionage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vassall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vassall https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/how-north-koreas-female-spies-are-trained-in-the-art-of-seduction-blackmail-and-murder/news-story/e436887ebd89e8f9d7c57ebd8d939b87 https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/how-no... https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/nsa-tracking-online-porn-viewing-discredit-radicalizers https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/nsa-tracking-online-po... https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/echoing-dirty-past-nsa-sought-reveal-porn-habits-discredit-targets https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/echoing-dirty-pa... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/27/nsa-files-live-coverage-developments-reaction https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/27/nsa-files-live... It's such a successful strategy, even Bitcoin scammers use it: https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/extortion-spam/25070/ https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/extortion-spam/25070/ https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/asia/south-korea-telegram-sex-rooms-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/asia/south-korea-telegram...
Retr0id 9mo ago
So? I'm an adult. I do adult things sometimes. In fact, that's when I'd value anonymity the most!
- echelon 9mo ago
  The government would like to know. 1. So they can use it against you later if they want to (eg. blackmail, spying, etc.) 2. So they can start shutting off access to content that those in power don't like Calling it now: Reddit is next.
  - Retr0id 9mo ago
    Reddit is already like this in my country.
  - Natfan 9mo ago
    or just imprisoning/killing you, if the people you want to "adult" to are of the same gender as you
wolvoleo 9mo ago
Hmm what I talk about with my friends contains a LOT of nsfw so really without it any platform is useless to me. I know not everyone is so open but in the lgbt space most people are.
- xxxx_xxxx 9mo ago
  [dead]
- juliobbv 9mo ago
  Especially when the a big subset of adults misunderstand of the actual scope of what "nsfw" actually consists of, and unfortunately the lgbt space isn't immune to such harmful perspectives. I've been noticing people in this space react to these news in a very worrisome manner, either by downplaying the need of nsfw in their lives (ironically, hours after discussing a clearly-nsfw matter!), or even worse: by equating all nsfw to "porn"; giving them carte blanche to judge others who want the option for nsfw talk as "being in it just for sex". It's been shocking for me to see this phenomenon unveil in real time. This overwhelming "sanitizing" force that bulldozes through any nuance regarding the nature of being an adult in shared online adult spaces. It's especially rough for marginalized or minority communities, who oftentimes don't even have IRL spaces to talk about adult subject matters.
II2II 9mo ago
I wonder if the people who write these articles realize that they are doing more damage to their cause than good? At best, their lies come off as hysteria. As worse, their lies come off as conspiratorial paranoia. Either way, they are outright ignoring that these polices are put into place to address a very real problem with the status quo while failing to communicate what the very real issues with these policies are (nevermind proposing better ways to address the problem).
beloch 9mo ago
1. Given the bad press, they may reverse their decision to do this. 2. If they don't about-face, there's a lot about the implementation that remains to be seen. Personally, I use discord for things that should be completely unaffected by this. I will not verify my age if there are surprises. I'll leave. If the communities I'm a part of decide to move, I'll support them and move even if I don't run into surprises. There is absolutely no way we should support giving identifying information to a U.S. company given what's going on right now. The trust is no longer there. If you verify your identity, anything you say on Discord could be used against you if you ever pass through American borders.
- WorldMaker 9mo ago
  They've done this because AU, NZ, and the UK all require this today. At least 5 EU countries are voting on it [0] with several led by Denmark encouraging it to be an EU-wide law. Most US states have a law in some part of the process as well, with at least a handful with laws on the books [1]. At some point every social media service is going to have to do this. Discord got a ton of bad press by being the first to say it out loud (and ask for feedback about it!) and give a timeline for worldwide roll out (early May). Discord isn't going to be the last to announce it. I think we all expect Meta (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp) to roll out whatever their solution will be under the cover of darkness (and dark patterns), just shows up one day with no easy opt-out and worse than what Discord is currently planning. > There is absolutely no way we should support giving identifying information to a U.S. company given what's going on right now. For what little it is worth, so far Discord has been using a third-party vendor for handling this information called k-ID [2]. k-ID looks like it is fully remote and has a globally distributed workforce including many in the US, but its press kit and job posting imply it is a company registered and based out of the Republic of Singapore. [0] https://europeannewsroom.com/to-ban-or-not-to-ban-eu-countries-debate-social-media-age-limits/ https://europeannewsroom.com/to-ban-or-not-to-ban-eu-countri... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_age_verification_laws_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Social_media_age_verification_laws_as_of_may_3,_2025.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_age_verification_... [2] https://www.k-id.com/ https://www.k-id.com/
tbrownaw 9mo ago
> Here's the exact list of what's restricted if you don't verify: > >Content Filters: Sound like something people might not want tied to real-world identities. > >Age-gated Spaces: So, #politics in my local instance.
vpShane 9mo ago
Seeing more and more of 'This message is unavailable' - 'Discord requires ID in order to see certain messages' Pretty much an AI detecting vulgarity and blocking it, although actual racist, vulgarity gets through things like 'here with my gock' to 'troll it' are what I've seen. So, yes it is a requirement, and yes, they are censoring people and things, and requiring others to have an ID to see the messages as well. So 'Not mandatory for all accounts' is technically true, but I mean.. you get it, hopefully. > You will be able to join a Discord with your friends, chat, and do voice without age verification. No, building a community is a goal for many; this just isn't acceptable. > So the claim that Discord is making ID verification "mandatory" or that you need it for gaming chats is untrue. Again, not mandatory but creates more issues than it solves.

orbital-decay 9mo ago

A ton of very niche communities are age-restricted and there's no way users in them would doxx themselves, so this is the end of those communities.

hidden80 9mo ago

This. We've gotten really bad at headline bangin.

rockskon 9mo ago

Discord says they'll use some AI garbage tool. Those are prone to mistakes over a large enough userbase. It will not be a rare occurrence for an adult to be labelled a child until they debase themselves with a scan of their face or a copy of their government ID. For children - this mandate also still makes the decision on behalf of the parents that a child must submit a scan of their face to a third party. Moving to Persona for age verification involves verification data being sent outside of the user's phone - in direct contradiction to Discord's initial promise of keeping facial scan data solely on the phone. Third parties that we've been given no reason to trust will delete the data without using it for an improper purpose such as creating derivative info from the ID or facial scan itself unrelated to the sole purpose of verifying that an individual is an adult. While we're at it - is there any legitimate reason why Discord is associating a person's actual or estimated age with their account as opposed to storing a value that states if they are or are not an adult? That sort of granularity seems unrelated to the stated purpose.

mpeg 9mo ago
I don't love what discord is doing, but where are you getting the idea that discord is going to estimate the user's age using "some AI garbage tool"? The article says everyone is on "child" mode by default, and verification is only required if you need to use the features / access content marked as adult only.
- JohnMakin 9mo ago
  I know of at least one person who's child was flagged as 17 when they were 14. That seems like a mistake that should never, ever, ever happen if your goal is safety. The software sucks. The methodology sucks. The reason is flimsy at best.
  - eucyclos 9mo ago
    never, ever is quite strong wording when you're in an arms race with 14 year olds who want to gain illicit access to something digital. I know everyone's a digital native these days and real life isn't a 90s hacker movie, but 'rarely' already seems like a pretty high bar given how ingenious a 14 year old deprived of their preferred entertainment can get.
    - JohnMakin 9mo ago
      if your goal and reasoning is child safety this is a big issue that it can even happen. my point is these tools are unreliable. It is using a problem that cannot be fixed as justification for a big privacy invasion. I was 14 once too, that’s how I got into what I do now.
      - fushihara 9mo ago
        Then, out of respect for your view that children’s safety must be the absolute top priority and that false positives must never, ever be tolerated, let’s require people to personally visit Discord’s office in the United States with a government-issued ID, have it inspected, and formally swear an oath. Of course, Discord will retain the ID and the person’s facial photograph for a semi-permanent period. Naturally, that’s perfectly acceptable—after all, it’s for the safety of the children, right?

CivBase 9mo ago

> This is false. Age verification is not mandatory for all accounts. You will be able to join a Discord with your friends, chat, and do voice without age verification. You are correct. For now. But why would they stop there? Supposedly this is to protect teens. If that's true, why would they continue letting teens chat with anonymous users? What if they get tricked into sharing sensitive images or video of themselves? Surely we need to know everyone's ID to ensure teens aren't unwittingly chatting with a known predator. It's for their safety. But for now that's a bridge too far. For now. And why should we believe this even has anything to do with protecting teens? That's valuable data. Discord says they're not holding onto it... for now. But Discord is offering quite a lot to users for free. Why let such an obvious revenue source go unmonetized? They're doing this now because they're going public soon. Investors want an ROI and this action is sure to invite some competition. The people leaving want an alternative, so a competitor could get a foothold. Discord needs to stay ahead. And the users Discord keeps after this stunt are going to be the most resilient to leaving - the most exploitable. Surely they wouldn't care if the policy changes in the future. The sky isn't falling. But the frog is boiling.

renewiltord 9mo ago
Indeed, I've been saying this for decades now. Hacker News needs usernames to post. How long before they require real names? And then how long before they require IDs for those real names? And then how long before they need you to show up in person with your IDs for those real names? And then how long before they need you to bring notarized documents in person with your IDs for those real names? All so that we can post online about how Google is invading our privacy?
- CivBase 9mo ago
  I gave reasons for why Discord would escalate things. Your mocking example did not. That's the difference between a slippery slope fallacy and a legitimate argument.
  - renewiltord 9mo ago
    [flagged]

echelon 9mo ago

Let's call this what it is: 1. A way for politicians and the state to track porn habits to US citizens and use that information against them in the future. Blackmail for the future politicians, business leaders, and wealthy to coerce them into doing what those in power want. 2. A way for conservatives to tighten the noose around non-chaste materials and begin to purge them from the internet. And if that works, that's hardly the last thing that will go. Next will be LGBT content, women's rights content, atheist content, pro-labor content, and more. (Or if you're on the other side of the political spectrum, consider that the powers could be used to remove Christian content, 2nd Amendment content, etc. It doesn't really matter what is being removed, just that the mechanisms are in place and that powers can put a lid on the populace.) We aren't screaming loudly enough. Do not try to sugar coat this with a pedantic mistake. This is far worse. It's a first step down a path the Big Brother state wants. Yell. Scream. Protest.

Aurornis 9mo ago
> 1. A way for politicians and the state to track porn habits to US citizens and use that information against them in the future. This topic really brings out the crazy conspiracy theories. No, politicians are not using Discord age verification to track constituents' porn habits and blackmail them with it later.
- echelon 9mo ago
  You poor summer child. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEXINT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEXINT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexpionage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexpionage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vassall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vassall https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/how-north-koreas-female-spies-are-trained-in-the-art-of-seduction-blackmail-and-murder/news-story/e436887ebd89e8f9d7c57ebd8d939b87 https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/how-no... https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/nsa-tracking-online-porn-viewing-discredit-radicalizers https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/nsa-tracking-online-po... https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/echoing-dirty-past-nsa-sought-reveal-porn-habits-discredit-targets https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/echoing-dirty-pa... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/27/nsa-files-live-coverage-developments-reaction https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/27/nsa-files-live... It's such a successful strategy, even Bitcoin scammers use it: https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/extortion-spam/25070/ https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/extortion-spam/25070/ https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/asia/south-korea-telegram-sex-rooms-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/asia/south-korea-telegram...

Retr0id 9mo ago

So? I'm an adult. I do adult things sometimes. In fact, that's when I'd value anonymity the most!

echelon 9mo ago
The government would like to know. 1. So they can use it against you later if they want to (eg. blackmail, spying, etc.) 2. So they can start shutting off access to content that those in power don't like Calling it now: Reddit is next.
- Retr0id 9mo ago
  Reddit is already like this in my country.
- Natfan 9mo ago
  or just imprisoning/killing you, if the people you want to "adult" to are of the same gender as you

wolvoleo 9mo ago

Hmm what I talk about with my friends contains a LOT of nsfw so really without it any platform is useless to me. I know not everyone is so open but in the lgbt space most people are.

xxxx_xxxx 9mo ago
[dead]
juliobbv 9mo ago
Especially when the a big subset of adults misunderstand of the actual scope of what "nsfw" actually consists of, and unfortunately the lgbt space isn't immune to such harmful perspectives. I've been noticing people in this space react to these news in a very worrisome manner, either by downplaying the need of nsfw in their lives (ironically, hours after discussing a clearly-nsfw matter!), or even worse: by equating all nsfw to "porn"; giving them carte blanche to judge others who want the option for nsfw talk as "being in it just for sex". It's been shocking for me to see this phenomenon unveil in real time. This overwhelming "sanitizing" force that bulldozes through any nuance regarding the nature of being an adult in shared online adult spaces. It's especially rough for marginalized or minority communities, who oftentimes don't even have IRL spaces to talk about adult subject matters.

II2II 9mo ago

I wonder if the people who write these articles realize that they are doing more damage to their cause than good? At best, their lies come off as hysteria. As worse, their lies come off as conspiratorial paranoia. Either way, they are outright ignoring that these polices are put into place to address a very real problem with the status quo while failing to communicate what the very real issues with these policies are (nevermind proposing better ways to address the problem).

beloch 9mo ago

1. Given the bad press, they may reverse their decision to do this. 2. If they don't about-face, there's a lot about the implementation that remains to be seen. Personally, I use discord for things that should be completely unaffected by this. I will not verify my age if there are surprises. I'll leave. If the communities I'm a part of decide to move, I'll support them and move even if I don't run into surprises. There is absolutely no way we should support giving identifying information to a U.S. company given what's going on right now. The trust is no longer there. If you verify your identity, anything you say on Discord could be used against you if you ever pass through American borders.

WorldMaker 9mo ago
They've done this because AU, NZ, and the UK all require this today. At least 5 EU countries are voting on it [0] with several led by Denmark encouraging it to be an EU-wide law. Most US states have a law in some part of the process as well, with at least a handful with laws on the books [1]. At some point every social media service is going to have to do this. Discord got a ton of bad press by being the first to say it out loud (and ask for feedback about it!) and give a timeline for worldwide roll out (early May). Discord isn't going to be the last to announce it. I think we all expect Meta (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp) to roll out whatever their solution will be under the cover of darkness (and dark patterns), just shows up one day with no easy opt-out and worse than what Discord is currently planning. > There is absolutely no way we should support giving identifying information to a U.S. company given what's going on right now. For what little it is worth, so far Discord has been using a third-party vendor for handling this information called k-ID [2]. k-ID looks like it is fully remote and has a globally distributed workforce including many in the US, but its press kit and job posting imply it is a company registered and based out of the Republic of Singapore. [0] https://europeannewsroom.com/to-ban-or-not-to-ban-eu-countries-debate-social-media-age-limits/ https://europeannewsroom.com/to-ban-or-not-to-ban-eu-countri... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_age_verification_laws_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Social_media_age_verification_laws_as_of_may_3,_2025.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_age_verification_... [2] https://www.k-id.com/ https://www.k-id.com/

tbrownaw 9mo ago

> Here's the exact list of what's restricted if you don't verify: > >Content Filters: Sound like something people might not want tied to real-world identities. > >Age-gated Spaces: So, #politics in my local instance.

vpShane 9mo ago

Seeing more and more of 'This message is unavailable' - 'Discord requires ID in order to see certain messages' Pretty much an AI detecting vulgarity and blocking it, although actual racist, vulgarity gets through things like 'here with my gock' to 'troll it' are what I've seen. So, yes it is a requirement, and yes, they are censoring people and things, and requiring others to have an ID to see the messages as well. So 'Not mandatory for all accounts' is technically true, but I mean.. you get it, hopefully. > You will be able to join a Discord with your friends, chat, and do voice without age verification. No, building a community is a goal for many; this just isn't acceptable. > So the claim that Discord is making ID verification "mandatory" or that you need it for gaming chats is untrue. Again, not mandatory but creates more issues than it solves.